Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCP-21-CR-0001646-2008 COMMONWEALTH : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : V. : : ADAM M. LOUDEN : CP-21-CR-1646-2008 IN RE: PETITION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT Masland, J., September 9, 2010:-- Before the court is Adam M. Louden’s petition to post-conviction relief, in which he claims counsel was ineffective for failing to file a motion under Pa.R.Crim.P. 600. Petitioner claims that twenty-two months transpired between the time he was charged and the time of his sentence; however, for the reasons set forth below, the court finds no violation of Rule 600. The Commonwealth has not only contested the speedy trial aspect but has challenged the defendant’s standing to file the motion itself based on Commonwealth v. Ahlborn, 683 A.2d 632 (Pa. Super. 1996), wherein the court held that “[u]pon unconditional release from custody, all cognizable harm necessarily ends and a pending petition, regardless of when it was filed, becomes moot.” Id. at 639. The court concurs with the Commonwealth’s assessment and dismisses his claim. BACKGROUND The pertinent dates with respect to both the speedy trial claim and the standing issue are as follows: 1. On October 17, 2007, a complaint was filed charging the defendant with driving under the influence under 75 Pa.C.S. § 3802(a) and 3802(c) (Commonwealth PCRA Hearing Exhibit #1). CP-21-CR-1646-2008 2. On June 25, 2008, (252 days later) the defendant waived his preliminary hearing and requested admission into the Cumberland County Accelerated Rehabilitation Program (ARD). The request for admission included a specific waiver wherein the petitioner “agree[d] to waive or give up [his] rights under Rule 600 for the time between the date of initial ARD consideration, as noted below, and removal from the program.” (Commonwealth PCRA Hearing Exhibit #2). 3. On December 15, 2008, the Cumberland County Office of the District Attorney informed petitioner that his case had been “denied the ARD program.” (Commonwealth PCRA Hearing Exhibit #4). 4. On April 6, 2009 (112 days after the denial of ARD) petitioner entered a plea of guilty to driving under the influence. 5. On August 18, 2009, the Honorable Edgar B. Bayley sentenced the petitioner to 72 hours to six months and directed him to report for imposition of the sentence on August 21, 2009 at 9:00 a.m. 6. On February 16, 2010, this court revoked petitioner’s parole and remanded him to prison for the balance of his unexpired term. The petitioner was given credit from December 22, 2009. 7. On or about June 20, 2010, petitioner completed service of the aforesaid sentence and was released to other detainers. 8. Petitioner filed his PCRA petition on April 26, 2010. 9. Counsel was appointed to represent petitioner on May 3, 2010. 10. A hearing was held on August 23, 2010. -2- CP-21-CR-1646-2008 DISCUSSION The Ahlborn case clearly resolved the issue of standing against petitioner. Although the petition was filed before he completed his period of incarceration, the hearing was held at least two months after his unconditional release, making it impossible for this or any court to grant him relief. However, lest there be any issue regarding the underlying Rule 600 claim, the aforesaid timeframe also makes manifest the fact that petitioner’s case was resolved in 364 days. There were 252 days from the filing of the complaint to petitioner’s request for ARD (at which time the clock stopped) and another 112 days from the denial of ARD until petitioner’s guilty plea. With respect to this case, time is not on petitioner’s side, and neither is this court. Accordingly, the following order will be entered: ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this day of September, 2010, after a hearing on August 23, 2010, it appearing that the petitioner is not entitled to PCRA relief based on the ruling in Commonwealth v. Ahlborn, 683 A.2d 632 (Pa. Super. DISMISSED. 1996), his petition is By the Court, Albert H. Masland, J. District Attorney’s Office Gregory B. Abeln, Esquire Court-appointed for Petitioner :saa -3- COMMONWEALTH : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : V. : : ADAM M. LOUDEN : CP-21-CR-1646-2008 IN RE: PETITION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this day of September, 2010, after a hearing on August 23, 2010, it appearing that the petitioner is not entitled to PCRA relief based on the ruling in Commonwealth v. Ahlborn, 683 A.2d 632 (Pa. Super. DISMISSED. 1996), his petition is By the Court, Albert H. Masland, J. District Attorney’s Office Gregory B. Abeln, Esquire Court-appointed for Petitioner :saa